Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/12/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-7 are currently pending;
Claims 2 and 5 are canceled;
Claim 1 is amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Matsuzaki does not disclose, teach, or suggest ‘wherein the negative active material layer comprises about 0.1 wt% or less of the microgel based on the total weight of 100 wt% of the negative active material layer’ as now recited in claim 1” due to the cited paragraph [0096] of Matsuzaki stating the amount of crosslinked polymer in the electrode mixture layer composition in reference to the total amount of the active material rather than the total amount of the negative active material layer (see Remarks, page 5). The examiner respectfully disagrees. While the examiner acknowledges that the cited paragraph [0096] of Matsuzaki does teach the amount of crosslinked polymer, interpreted as the claimed microgel, in an amount of 0.1 to 20 mass% based on the total amount of active material rather than the claimed “total weight of 100 wt% of the negative active material layer”, Matsuzaki still teaches an overlapping range of the claimed range. Taken alone, paragraph [0096] teaches the crosslinked polymer in an amount of 0.1 to 20 mass % of the total amount of active material. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the active material would constitute a portion of the active material layer, meaning that the percentage of the crosslinked polymer/microgel with respect to the total negative active material later would have to be less than the stated mass percentage with respect to the active material in paragraph [0096]. Therefore, the amount of crosslinked polymer/microgel with respect to the total negative active material layer would have to be less than the stated range of 0.1 mass% to 20 mass% of paragraph [0096], overlapping the claimed 0.1 wt% or less.
Further, Matsuzaki also explicitly teaches the amount of active material with respect to the total electrode mixture layer composition. In the embodiment of the electrode mixture layer composition in a slurry form, the amount of electrode active material is 10 to 75 mass % of the total amount of the composition (Matsuzaki [0105]), and when the electrode mixture layer composition is prepared in a wet powder state, the amount of active material is 60 to 97 mass % of the total amount of composition (Matsuzaki [0106]). Taking either case in combination with the range of crosslinked polymer in reference to the active material taught in paragraph [0096] of Matsuzaki would result in an overlapping range of crosslinked polymer/microgel with respect to the entire electrode mixture layer composition as claimed. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuzaki et al. (US-20170352886-A1), hereinafter Matsuzaki, in view of Yamada et al. (US-20210091370-A1), hereinafter Yamada.
Regarding claim 1, Matsuzaki teaches a negative electrode ([0012]) for a rechargeable lithium battery ([0001] lithium-ion secondary battery), comprising: a current collector; and a negative active material layer on at least one surface of the current collector ([0004] each electrode is formed of a collector and a mixture layer formed on a surface of the collector), wherein the negative active material layer comprises a negative active material ([0004] active material) and a microgel having a size of about 50 nm to about 500 nm ([0063] crosslinked polymer as a microgel; [0059] crosslinked polymer particle diameter in the range of 0.1 to 7 μm, which equates to 100 to 7000 nm), and the negative active material layer comprises about 0.1 wt% or less of the microgel based on the total weight of 100 wt% of the negative active material layer ([0096] the amount of crosslinked polymer used in the electrode mixture layer is 0.1 mass % to 20 mass %; [0106] when the electrode mixture layer is prepared in a wet powder state, the amount of active material used is in the range of 60 to 97 mass % of the total amount of the electrode mixture layer composition, meaning the amount of crosslinked polymer, interpreted as the microgel, is in the range of 0.06 mass % to 19.4 mass % of the total amount of the electrode mixture layer composition; alternatively, when the electrode mixture layer composition is in slurry form, the amount of active material is 10 to 75 mass % of the total amount of the composition, meaning the amount of crosslinked polymer is in the range of 0.01 to 15 mass % of the total composition). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Matsuzaki fails to teach the negative active material layer having a porosity of about 27% to about 60%.
Yamada is considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of electrodes for secondary batteries ([0003]). Yamada teaches the negative active material layer having a porosity of about 27% to about 60% ([0068] porosity of the negative electrode in the range of 20% to 50%). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuzaki such that the negative active material layer has a porosity in the range of about 27% to about 60% such as in Yamada. Doing so allows for a high-density negative electrode with excellent affinity with a nonaqueous electrolyte (Yamada [0068]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Matsuzaki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Matsuzaki also teaches that the microgel is in the form of a particle ([0058]-[0059] the crosslinked polymer has a particle diameter, therefore it is in the form of a particle).
Regarding claim 4, modified Matsuzaki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Matsuzaki also teaches that the microgel comprises an acryl-based polymer ([0030] includes ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer; [0031]-[0032] the ethylenically unsaturated carboxylic acid monomer introduced by polymerizing monomers such as (meth)acrylic acid, (meth)acrylamide, (meth)acrylonitrile, etc.).
Regarding claim 6, modified Matsuzaki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Matsuzaki also teaches that the negative active material layer comprises about 0.05 wt% to about 0.1 wt% of the microgel based on the total weight of 100 wt% of the negative active material layer ([0096] the amount of crosslinked polymer used in the electrode mixture layer is 0.1 to 20 mass %). In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 7, modified Matsuzaki teaches all of the limitations of claim 1. Matsuzaki also teaches a rechargeable lithium battery ([0001]), comprising: a negative electrode of claim 1; a positive electrode ([0127] separator between the positive and negative electrodes); and an electrolyte ([0126] nonaqueous electrolyte).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON L KYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-0164. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 AM - 5 PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Niki Bakhtiari can be reached at (571) 272-3433. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/M.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1722
/ANCA EOFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1722
